At the annual National Association of Realtors convention at the end of 2010, the NAR members voted in an amendment to Article 10 of the Code of Ethics to include sexual orientation as a protected class alongside race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status and handicap. We applauded NAR for implementing the change prior to HUD changing the law.
Since the change in Article 10, we’ve had a number of conversations offline with individuals involved in the passage of the change and consumers impacted by the change.
We learned from Professional Standards Committee member Sheila Bell that the concept of protecting this class was introduced by the Minneapolis Association of Realtors at the Equal Opportunity/Cultural Diversity Committee at the May Mid-Year meetings. Bell said, “From that committee, it was referred to the Professional Standards Committee; the committee that oversees the Code of Ethics. In both committees, the vote was unanimous! As a Realtor of nearly 25 years, this is the proudest I’ve ever been to belong to the National Association of Realtors.”
When asked about the downside, Bell insisted that there is no downside. “This is a momentous move forward for the Realtor family. We have set the pace for the Country rather than following and it ensures that attention will be paid to those folks who may have suffered.”
When asked about the 7% of members that voted against the change in the CoE, Bill Lublin, member of various NAR committees since 1999 noted, “I can’t tell you what the reasoning might have been for voting against this since I was an advocate for the change. It may be because this is the first time that the Code of Ethics has led the law rather than followed existing laws.”
So where’s the part about how the LGBT community can suffer?
First of all, you should know that we (Benn Rosales, AG founder and I) live in Austin which is extremely LGBT friendly and we’ve personally advocated for the community locally, so we are glad that NAR members voted sexual orientation as a protected class, it should have been protected all along, but it’s better late than never.
But we’ve been talking to a lot of our friends locally and I wonder if the Article 10 update changes how LGBT-niched agents market or interact? When someone gets in your car and says, “don’t take me to a black neighborhood,” that’s the nice way of saying “I want to live in a white neighborhood.” You’re taught in real estate school that not only for E&O reasons but ethical reasons, you should sever your relationship with that individual as they are asking you to violate the CoE and discriminate. So what now when someone gets in your car and says “don’t put me in a queer neighborhood?” If it wasn’t already your inclination to kick them to the curb, now the CoE says your participation in doing so would be discriminatory. Fantastic, that’s how it should be. But what about when someone gets in your car and says “I grew up in a really anti-gay community where I was bullied and physically assaulted, please help me find somewhere that I will be safe that is gay friendly.” What then? Your inclination is that they’re a protected class, you must protect, but when a class is protected under HUD Fair Housing Laws or the NAR CoE, you cannot discriminate. So now must you sever ties with them the same as when someone says “don’t put me in a white neighborhood?”
Should agents that cater to the LGBT community remove any LGBT reference from their marketing for implication that they will not serve straight clients (also a protected class now)? Should Realtors who have websites devoted to LGBT friendly communities have to take those sites down because the implication is that they will not serve non-LGBT clients?
We wonder what the full scope of Article 10 means for the real estate community? On one hand we most sincerely applaud the passage of the amendment, we are unclear as to how marketing to the LGBT community or getting those intimate questions in the car are changed. Tell us in comments what you think the shift looks like and if there is a shift at all?
Courtesy of NAR, here are the Article 10 notes from May if you’re interested:
Austin tops the list of best places to buy a home
When looking to buy a home, taking the long view is important before making such a huge investment – where are the best places to make that commitment?
Looking at the bigger picture
(REALUOSO.COM) – Let us first express that although we are completely biased about Texas (we’re headquartered here, I personally grew up here), the data is not – Texas is the best. That’s a scientific fact. There’s a running joke in Austin that if there is a list of “best places to [anything],” we’re on it, and the joke causes eye rolls instead of humility (we’re sore winners and sore losers in this town).
That said, SelfStorage.com dug into the data and determined that the top 12 places to buy a home are currently Texas and North Carolina (and Portland, I guess you’re okay too or whatever).
They examined the nerdiest of numbers from the compound annual growth rate in inflation-adjusted GDP to cost premium, affordability, taxes, job growth, and housing availability.
“Buying a house is a big decision and a big commitment,” the company notes. “Although U.S. home prices have risen in the long term, the last decade has shown that path is sometimes full of twists, turns, dizzying heights and steep, abrupt falls. Today, home prices are stabilizing and increasing in most areas of the U.S.”
Average age of houses on the rise, so is it now better or worse to buy new?
With aging housing in America, are first-time buyers better off buying new or existing homes? The average age of a home is rising, as is the price of new housing, so a shift could be upon us.
The average home age is higher than ever
(REALUOSO.COM) – In a survey from the Department of Housing and Urban Development American Housing Survey (AHS), the median age of homes in the United States was 35 years old. In Texas, homes are a bit younger with the median age between 19 – 29 years. The northeast has the oldest homes, with the median age between 50 – 61 years. In 1985, the median age of a home was only 23 years.
With more houses around 40 years old, the National Association of Realtors asserts that homeowners will have to undertake remodeling and renovation projects before selling unless the home is sold as-is, in which case the buyer will be responsible to update their new residence. Even homeowners who aren’t selling will need to consider remodeling for structural and aesthetic reasons.
Prices of new homes on the rise
Newer homes cost more than they used to. The price differential between new homes and older homes has increased from 10 percent traditionally to around 37 percent in 2014. This is due to rising construction costs, scarcity of lots, and a low inventory of new homes that doesn’t meet the demand.
Are Realtors the real loser in the fight between Zillow Group and Move, Inc.?
The last year has been one of dramatic and rapid change in the real estate tech sector, but Realtors are vulnerable, and we’re worried.
Why Realtors are vulnerable to these rapid changes
(REALUOSO.COM) – Corporate warfare demands headlines in every industry, but in the real estate tech sector, a storm has been brewing for years, which in the last year has come to a head. Zillow Group and Move, Inc. (which is owned by News Corp. and operates ListHub, Realtor.com, TopProducer, and other brands) have been competing for a decade now, and the race has appeared to be an aggressive yet polite boxing match. Last year, the gloves came off, and now, they’ve drawn swords and appear to want blood.
Note: We’ll let you decide which company plays which role in the image above.
So how then, does any of this make Realtors the victims of this sword fight? Let’s get everyone up to speed, and then we’ll discuss.
1. Zillow poaches top talent, Move/NAR sues
It all started last year when the gloves came off – Move’s Chief Strategy Officer (who was also Realtor.com’s President), Errol Samuelson jumped ship and joined Zillow on the same day he phoned in his resignation without notice. He left under questionable circumstances, which has led to a lengthy legal battle (wherein Move and NAR have sued Zillow and Samuelson over allegations of breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and misappropriation of trade secrets), with the most recent motion being for contempt, which a judge granted to Move/NAR after the mysterious “Samuelson Memo” surfaced.
Salt was added to the wound when Move awarded Samuelson’s job to Move veteran, Curt Beardsley, who days after Samuelson left, also defected to Zillow. This too led to a lawsuit, with allegations including breach of contract, violation of corporations code, illegal dumping of stocks, and Move has sought restitution. These charges are extremely serious, but demanded slightly less attention than the ongoing lawsuit against Samuelson.
2. Two major media brands emerge
Tech News6 days ago
Internet of Things and deep learning: How your devices are getting smarter
Opinion Editorials2 weeks ago
Improve UX design by tracking your users’ eye movements
Business News2 weeks ago
Driverless delivery startup raises half a billion dollars to transport local goods
Business News2 weeks ago
Movie theaters explore renting out their space to survive COVID
Tech News2 weeks ago
First wireless, now headphoneless headphones? Enter, Soundbeamer
Tech News2 weeks ago
Microsoft engineer *almost* gets away with $10 million
Business Marketing2 weeks ago
This new Chipotle location will be fully digital
Tech News2 weeks ago
Google is giving back some privacy control? (You read that right)